Yea, Davies does seem to like the Reversed Philidor for White here on chesspublishing.com. However, I like what he recommends against the Reversed Philidor in his book Play 1 e4 e5!, 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 c3 Nf6 4 d3 d5 5 Nbd2 a5! 6 Be2 g6!

It's interesting to recall that Karpov gave 3...d5 as dubious after he got in trouble with it against Ljubojevic in the mid-'70s. ECO in the '90s gave the line Kaufman recommends (4...Bd7 and later ...Nf6 rather than ...Bd6) as slightly better for White; they were quoting Romanishin, but what they gave was certainly incomplete/unconvincing.

The Ponziani was a pet opening of mine a long time ago. What led me to give it up were some lines of the sort 3...d5 4. Qa4 f6 5. Bb5 Ne7 6. ed Qxd5 7. d4 Bd7 followed by ...ed plus ...Ne5 or ...a6 and ...Na7, where Black basically tries to trade some pieces and leave White with an iffy IQP position. Though later it appeared to me that White has some aggressive tries in such lines that I might not have been aware of.

Some time later, when playing Black against a Ponziani-playing opponent, I intended to try the line mentioned by CheckMate (which has been played by Spassky and some other strong players). Later still I noticed that one Ponziani book seemed to think that 6. Qb3 (which had been played a few times by the Bulgarian-US IM Minev) should lead to an edge for White, a claim of which I grew somewhat skeptical.

I too am skeptical of such strong "anti-Ponziani" claims. I notice that Kaufman, in his best-play line, only claims that Black has "full compensation for the pawn" (though he adds some other verbiage such as "at least White isn't clearly worse"). Another bit I notice is that earlier in that line he doesn't mention the way White played in Planinc - Mariotti 1970 (two GMs of that decade). Planinc won; after about 20 moves it was maybe equalish though my inclination is to prefer White.

I don't think that 3...d5 refutes the Ponziani, but I think it invalidates it in the sense that Black is fine and even develops some initiative in many lines. Analogously, I think that 1...e5 2.Bb2 Bxb4 invalidates 1.b4. I have to laugh at anyone's worry over 4.d3. White then has a perfectly sound position, how many Whites would play so unambitiously, how many Blacks would be worried if they did?

One reply to 3...d5 that he doesn't cover is 4 d3. This is analyzed on chesspublishing.com as at least being equal for White. However, I am not so sure that 4...dxe4 5 dxe4 Qxd1 6 Kxd1 is ok for White.

I would prefer to be Black after 4...Nf6, but that is a question of taste, I suppose, as Nigel Davies seemed to be quite keen on these reversed Philidor positions when he was in charge of the section.

I too am skeptical of such strong "anti-Ponziani" claims. I notice that Kaufman, in his best-play line, only claims that Black has "full compensation for the pawn" (though he adds some other verbiage such as "at least White isn't clearly worse"). Another bit I notice is that earlier in that line he doesn't mention the way White played in Planinc - Mariotti 1970 (two GMs of that decade). Planinc won; after about 20 moves it was maybe equalish though my inclination is to prefer White.

Larry Kaufman in the Chess Advantage in Black and White believes that 3...d5 comes very close to refuting the Ponziani. One reply to 3...d5 that he doesn't cover is 4 d3. This is analyzed on chesspublishing.com as at least being equal for White. However, I am not so sure that 4...dxe4 5 dxe4 Qxd1 6 Kxd1 is ok for White.

There's been a lot of talk about the Ponziani being refuted in a couple of other threads, I thought it might be worth starting a more concerted conversation. I've been having trouble with the "Ponz" from the Black side in a correspondence game. White can realize a fairly significant attack in many lines if Black isn't careful, so I elected to get the queens off the board. I should be okay, but I have a hard time believing that the Ponziani is busted. The game has progressed further, but for our purposes I suspect the line below is sufficient. Are there better ways for Black to play?